Josh Babarinde MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  In February, Capita said to Eastbourne resident Keith that his civil service pension would be paid by March. By March, it said his pension would be paid in April. Now it says that it will not be paid before May. How will the Minister intervene to hold this cowboy corporate to account?

• 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for securing the debate. The current student loans regime has transformed halls of residence into a student “Hotel California”, where folks can check out—they can graduate—but can never leave. They can pay exactly what is asked of them month on month, yet end up with a total bill that gets bigger year on year. It was the prospect of a greater bill burden that fired me up, as a student in 2010, to stand in Parliament Square and oppose some of the changes that were coming through, but the effect of those reforms has been compounded by two key changes on the watches of subsequent Governments. The first is the Conservatives’ unilateral removal of maintenance grants, which forced students to borrow even more to live. Indeed, the proportion of students taking out only a tuition fee loan, and no maintenance loan, is the highest in a decade. That means either that the student population is now skewed towards those who are more privileged, which calls into question its inclusion, or that less well-off students are going without the maintenance support that they need and deserve. Either outcome would be a shameful reality. The second key change, which the hon. Member for Ilford South highlighted, is the freezing of the repayment threshold—a student stealth tax that will make it even more difficult for students to live going forward. That is why I call on the Government to revisit the freezing of the threshold and to reinstate maintenance grants for students.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the news that the people of East Sussex and Eastbourne will at last have the chance to vote to boot out a Conservative-run county council that has attempted to close a learning disability centre for local people, Linden Court; that has attempted to strip back services at Milton Grange for people with dementia; and that has the worst pothole compensation rate of any Conservative-run council in the country. However, will the Secretary of State pledge to not just me or the people of Eastbourne, but the people of East Sussex, that he will not disrespect their right to democracy next year when they are meant to have the right to vote for unitary councillors in our patch?

• 26 Jan 2026 · Armed Forces Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will use my time in this debate to highlight an injustice that strikes at the very heart of the armed forces covenant: the injustice suffered by a legendary Eastbournian, Staff Sergeant Pauline Cole. Pauline served our country during the Aden emergency in 1967, and she wrote about her experiences in her book “Army Girl: The Untold Story”. She developed skin damage and post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of her military service. After tribunals rightfully awarded her compensation for those lifelong conditions, she should have been able to live with greater financial security in her retirement. Instead, the opposite happened. Military compensation is treated as income when calculating pension credit, so most of what Pauline won at tribunal was effectively taken away by the Department for Work and Pensions. Her pension credit fell from £77 a week to just £11 a week. Pauline was financially punished for being injured in the service of her country. This is not just Pauline’s story; the Royal British Legion estimates that over 50,000 war disablement pensioners of retirement age face the same perverse outcome. What makes it worse and even more outrageous is that civil compensation is not treated as income for pension credit; only military compensation is penalised in this way. It is also outrageous in the light of the fact that LGBT+ veterans who received compensation following the Etherton review were explicitly, and rightly, told that their payments would not affect their benefits. We have to ask: why are injured veterans under the war pension scheme treated differently, and why does our system force our poorest veterans to use compensation awarded for pain, injury and lost quality of life to cover basic living costs? I was proud to use my first ever question to the Prime Minister in this place to raise this injustice at the highest level, and I was proud to leverage a meeting with the Pensions Minister to discuss it further. There were many, many warm words but no action. I promised Pauline that I would do my very best to fight this injustice on her behalf. With huge sadness, Pauline died on 30 November last year, without seeing the justice that she was so determined to secure. At her funeral earlier this month, I restated to her sons Les and Simon Haffenden and to all her loved ones gathered there my promise to continue to fight tooth and nail for Pauline and veterans like her. To that end, this week marks my tabling of my armed forces compensation scheme and war pension scheme report Bill—Pauline’s law—as a step toward correcting the injustice permanently. As this Government’s Armed Forces Bill progresses through Parliament, the Minister has an incredible opportunity—a duty, in my view—to act through his own legislation to correct this gross injustice. I urge the Government to amend the Bill to ensure that no veteran’s pension credit, or indeed any benefit, is reduced because they received compensation for serving their country. I would love to work in a cross-party way on this issue. I know that the hon. Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) is passionate about this issue, as are the hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi), my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) and many others. Indeed, it was mentioned by our spokesperson, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (James MacCleary). We owe our veterans nothing less than the dignity, security and fairness that they were promised when they signed up to serve. Pauline deserved better, our veterans deserve better, and this House must do better.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Temporary Accommodation: Out of Area Placements · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is absolutely right to highlight the scandal that families face in his own constituency, but what is even more scandalous is that that is not the exception; it is happening in too many places. Due consideration is not given for families with children with special educational needs. That consideration does not go far enough, and too many councils are not just failing when it comes to making those kinds of assessments but failing to uphold their wider duties of care, communications standards and accountability in following those people and their families wherever they are placed. In Eastbourne, this issue particularly grew during the pandemic following the introduction of the last Government’s “Everyone In” directive, under which people who were experiencing homelessness were rapidly—and rightly—placed into temporary accommodation, including hotels and bed and breakfasts, in order to protect their health and public health more widely. Although that approach was formally stepped down by the Government after the first lockdown, many local authorities have continued to use that model. While “Everyone In” was extremely well intentioned, it has since become an embedded, informal and unregulated practice that contributes to the sustained use of out of area temporary accommodation without the necessary support in place. Over the last couple of years, out of area placements in Eastbourne have increased fourfold, to the 209 that Eastbourne hosts today. As I have said in this very room before, out of area placements now account for 46% of all temporary accommodation placements in Eastbourne, with the majority being from Brighton and Hove city council. There are currently 178 placements by Brighton and Hove city council in Eastbourne, and 31 from other neighbouring districts, such as Hastings, Worthing and Rother, and a small number from London. To the point made by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), this is not just a local issue but a national one. At the end of June 2025, 42,080 households were living in temporary accommodation outside their home local authority. That represents an increase of more than 10% since 2021. London accounts for a significant proportion of such placements, reflecting the acute pressures in the capital. I recognise the scale of the challenge there, but that pattern has clear consequences for other towns and cities across the country, which are increasingly expected to meet these needs without the resources, co-ordination or accountability that should accompany that expectation. After years of sustained pressure and negotiation by Eastbourne borough council, our town has finally secured somewhat more consistent notifications from placing authorities when individuals are moved into the borough. Although that progress is welcome, serious information gaps remain. Too often, notifications are incomplete, with receiving authorities not provided with information on key risk factors such as histories of domestic abuse or other serious vulnerabilities. That leaves frontline services without the information that they need to keep those individuals, staff and the wider community safe. If a duty of care is to mean anything, it must include the timely sharing of appropriate and proportionate case details across local authority boundaries to ensure that safeguarding responsibilities can be properly discharged.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Merry Christmas to you, the House staff and the Doorkeepers, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to say a massive thank you to Andy, Helen and other staff, as well as Mr Speaker, for facilitating my asking a very big question in Parliament a matter of weeks ago to my now fiancé. My question today is on behalf of the people of Sovereign Harbour in Eastbourne, where thousands of homeowners are forced to pay hundreds of pounds a year for the maintenance of sea defences. This situation is an anomaly; in no other harbour in the UK—or, we think, in Europe—does such a charge exist. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate in Government time on the fairness and transparency of this arrangement, so that the people of Sovereign Harbour can get the answers and the justice that they deserve?

• 4 Dec 2025 · Local Elections · Hansard source

  More

  A democracy in which a Government can unilaterally chop and change the date of an election on a whim ceases to be a democracy altogether. This decision is taking the people of Eastbourne and Sussex for fools and must be resisted. Will the Minister give a cast-iron guarantee that the East Sussex county council elections will take place in 2026, and will she confirm that the mayoral election, which is now delayed until 2028, will take place under single transferable vote and not first past the post?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q3. Lewis—not his real name—is an Eastbourne boy with special educational needs who was left traumatised after his passenger assistant relentlessly and brutally restrained him on his home-to-school transport. What happened on that day only became clear to Lewis’s mum, who is in the Gallery today, when he returned home visibly distressed and bruised, and that is because, shockingly, there is no statutory requirement to report incidents of physical restraint on school transport, nor national training standards. Will the Prime Minister address this loophole in his upcoming special educational needs and disabilities reforms to ensure that SEND children in Eastbourne and beyond can travel to school with the safety and dignity that they deserve?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It has been great to work with Ministers at the Ministry of Justice and to help drive that identifier forward. Will the Minister join me in celebrating the incredible bravery of ITV’s “Loose Women”, many of whom, through their “Facing It Together” campaign, have spoken out about their experiences of domestic abuse, and will he, or a fellow Minister from the MOJ, come and meet them next Wednesday from 12.30 pm onwards, in the Attlee Suite, where I shall be hosting them and we will be bringing the “Facing It Together” campaign to Parliament?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Duty of Candour for Public Authorities and Legal Representation for Bereaved Families · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I congratulate the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne) on securing this debate. On behalf of my party, I too pay tribute to the Hillsborough families in this landmark debate. After years of delay by the last Conservative Government —the Conservatives are, shamefully, barely represented here today—Liberal Democrats in Parliament and Liberal Democrat councillors such as Carl Cashman welcomed this Government’s commitment in the King’s Speech to create a statutory duty of candour on public authorities to force them to tell the truth. However, given the urgent need for such a duty, it is unacceptable that the Hillsborough law was not introduced in time for the 36th anniversary of the disaster, as the Prime Minister himself had promised. Ninety-seven men, women and children lost their lives as a result of the shameful events on that terrible day in 1989, yet the families of the victims were forced to wait decades for the truth, in the wake of institutional silence and deceit from state institutions. For years they were told that Liverpool fans were to blame, but they were not. It was police incompetence, a failure of safety and then a cover-up—a deliberate attempt by public officials to shift blame, rewrite the narrative and protect institutions instead of people. It was not only public institutions that were responsible for warping narratives. I will not name the title, but we all know a particular newspaper that still lives a legacy of shame for the way it demonised fans on that day. A legal duty of candour would not erase that tragedy, but it might have spared the families years of gaslighting, indignity and conflict. Similar is true of the Grenfell disaster, as the hon. Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) has powerfully said. Seventy-two lives were lost in that shocking disaster, including that of emerging photographer and artist Khadija Saye, who I knew. It was a tragedy that should never have happened, and a scandal that revealed deep systemic failures in not only fire safety but the way public authorities treat working-class communities, especially when they are black or brown. Even after the fire, we saw the same pattern again: a slow trickle of information, shifting stories and an instinct—a culture—of institutional self-preservation. We must ask ourselves, how many times will we allow this cycle to repeat? How many lives must be lost before we accept that the public deserve honesty from those in power?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Duty of Candour for Public Authorities and Legal Representation for Bereaved Families · Hansard source

  More

  The point my hon. Friend makes is testament to the importance of parity of legal representation. To continue, how many lives must be lost before we accept that the public deserve honesty from those in power? When will we get to the truth proactively, not just when institutions are dragged to the witness box? That must change. I pay tribute again to the tireless campaigners—the bereaved families of the Hillsborough disaster and the Grenfell tragedy, those wronged in the Post Office scandal and more—who have refused to accept institutional silence and deceit. However, it should not be up to victims or their grieving families to fight for decades to get answers; it should be the duty of the state to give them those answers—early, clearly and completely. The Government must act without further delay. I therefore urge the Minister to announce a timeline for a new statutory duty of candour now. I urge that it is not watered down under any circumstances, and it must be accompanied with parity of legal representation for bereaved families during inquests and inquiries into disasters or state-related deaths. This Parliament must be the one that says, “No more lies, no more hiding and no more protecting institutions over protecting people.”

• 22 Jul 2025 · Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to speak in this debate, named after the late Sir David Amess, to whom I wish to pay tribute. I also use this opportunity to pay tribute to the late Ian Gow, one of my predecessors as a hard-working Member of Parliament for Eastbourne, who was appallingly assassinated in 1990, and whose shield is on the door above the entrance to this Chamber. I thank all those involved in keeping MPs and our teams safe today, with special mention to PC Will Bayley, who has helped my team and me to manage some concerning threats to us. It has been an action-packed first year as Eastbourne’s Member of Parliament. Working with incredible campaigners from across our town and beyond, we have: secured the reopening of Eastbourne district general hospital for births after months of closure; won our campaign for a direct train from Eastbourne to London Bridge and back; successfully led a national campaign to reform the law on domestic abuse; worked with campaigners to save Linden Court day centre for people with learning disabilities from closure; worked with local residents to protect the Sovereign Centre, where I learned to swim, from losing its pools; worked with Government and others to lock in £20 million in neighbourhood funding, which we thought we might lose after the election, to regenerate our town; and much, much more. However, one year in, after taking up more than 11,000 cases for residents, and more than 200 mentions of Eastbourne in the Chamber later, there is still much more to do. We need to fix our temporary accommodation catastrophe, which has been triggered by a housing shortage that can be addressed only if we build more housing and properly regulate temporary accommodation. We have a particular shortage of three-bedroom homes in Eastbourne, which is causing a huge challenge. As many other Members have said of their constituencies, we need to address the SEND crisis in our town, because families such as the Wilcocks and hundreds of others are left without the educational provision that they need. We need Southern Water to get a grip of the foul stench its water treatment works have been emitting across our town in recent months, blighting the lives of residents in Langney Point and beyond. We need a fix to this problem now, not next year, as Southern Water has said. Frankly, the CEO should be denied his outrageous pay rise while this issue remains and until local residents have been properly compensated. Beyond our shores, in response to the appalling situation in Israel and Gaza and on the west bank, the Government must continue to push for the release of all hostages, urge for aid to be let unobstructed into Gaza, ban arms sales to the Israeli Government, recognise a state of Palestine, and further sanction the Israeli Government when they infringe international law, and that includes sanctions on Netanyahu himself. It is an honour to have been elected to represent the town that made me the person I am—the town whose teachers believed in me, whose scout leaders challenged me and whose local businesses took a punt on me by giving me my first job. I hope to be able to represent our town for many, many years to come. As we draw to the end of our time before the summer recess, I would like to extend a very open invitation to Eastbourne to any hon. Member who has not yet booked their summer holiday. Eastbourne is officially the sunniest town in the UK. It has more hours of sunlight than anywhere else in the country—to the disdain of the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Alison Griffiths). I hope that Members will come and sample some of the best of Eastbourne delights.

• 22 Jul 2025 · Orgreave Inquiry · Hansard source

  More

  I came into the Chamber for this statement to hear and speak about the Orgreave inquiry, so it was pretty shocking to hear the shadow Minister use it as an opportunity to yet again play politics with child sexual abuse and exploitation. As a survivor myself, I find that particularly appalling. The Liberal Democrats welcome the announcement of a statutory inquiry into the events that took place between police and miners at Orgreave on 18 June 1984. For years, those caught up in the harrowing events of that day have had to carry the painful trauma of that unresolved injustice—not just the injuries sustained, but the police charges that were subsequently dropped. Over 40 years on, we must come together to ensure that this inquiry reaches its full potential and uncovers the answers that those impacted deeply deserve. That must include proper consultation, which will be key to rebuilding public trust. I would therefore welcome more details from the Minister about how local communities, campaigners, and impacted miners and their families will be involved throughout the inquiry. Inquiries can be a powerful tool for uncovering the truth about injustice, but they will only reach their full potential when there is a duty of candour that requires public officials and authorities to co-operate fully. As such, although the Government have committed to bringing such a duty of candour into force, will the Minister take this opportunity to provide a clear timeline for introducing a Hillsborough law to Parliament?